Live data from Hacker News

Governments Introduce Surveillance Under Veil of Coronavirus Control

forklog.media

41–50 of 120 posts

Re: Governments Introduce Surveillance Under Veil of Coronavirus Control

#41

The article claims China is a role model. However chinas reported numbers is not their actual numbers. We have no clue if China’s approach was effective. Even today ppl in China are still getting sick. With weekend traffic in Beijing not recovered.

I may have misinterpreted the author's intentions, but I think it was sarcasm.

Re: Governments Introduce Surveillance Under Veil of Coronavirus Control

#42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don’t blame governments. I blame all you idiots who won’t stop going outside. It's precisely this kind of reasoning that this article is having problems with. Pre-COVID19, it was because of the terrorists, drug dealers, and pedophiles that we'd have to give up our freedoms. Now, it's because of "us idiots." We the people are "too idiotic" to decide for ourselves, or so you say.

I know it's annecdotal, but now I've had two elderly relatives die -- one from covid-19, and one from a heart attack, in the past few weeks. The second wasn't able to get into the healthcare system because it is just too overstretched. Firstly, causes by a very slow ambulance, and got diverted to an ER just about as far away as you can get. I have also seen more people walking along our city exercise path than ever b…

I'm most certainly not opposed to saving lives. But we can't just mindlessly approve whatever "solutions" the government comes up with. Some "solutions" are bound to do more harm than good, and mass-surveillance is a prime example considering its potential for abuse. Just as people die from disease, people also die from tyrannical governments. Even if we assume that your government, however unlikely, would forever continue to wield its power wisely, other governments wouldn't care. If we justify the use of mass-surveillance, we would give other tyrannical governments a free pass and more people would be killed or tortured as a consequence. But unlike pandemics, time won't cure tyrannical governments.

Re: Governments Introduce Surveillance Under Veil of Coronavirus Control

#43
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Going outside is fine and recommended. Compliance, at least here, has been petty good. Imperfect, sure, but everyone I see out walking is keeping a safe distance.

True. Exercise is good for your immune system. But I think the public health experts probably meant for us to exercise alone. You still see lots of groups of 4 or 5 or more people out there in my area. And based on what people are saying, this must happen in other areas as well. Or my favorite are the groups of bicyclists exercising and keeping 6 ft away from each other. Think about it, one cyclist towards the front…

The guidance for keeping six feet apart doesn't apply to people who already live together. Keeping your distance isn't going to work if you're all going to touch the same surfaces at home, anyway. It can be tricky to tell if groups of people close together are family / roommates.

Re: Governments Introduce Surveillance Under Veil of Coronavirus Control

#44

It’s too bad that people can’t follow simple requests. Governments are forced to choose between allowing idiot citizens to destroy society or to implement draconian policies. Medical professionals are being asked to come out of retirement. Nurses are reusing PPE for weeks. Medical students are graduating early to help. The rest of us are being asked to just stay the fuck home for a few weeks. And we just refuse to do…

> I don’t blame governments. I blame all you idiots who won’t stop going outside. It's precisely this kind of reasoning that this article is having problems with. Pre-COVID19, it was because of the terrorists, drug dealers, and pedophiles that we'd have to give up our freedoms. Now, it's because of "us idiots." We the people are "too idiotic" to decide for ourselves, or so you say.

The shelter in place orders started off completely voluntary. People ignored them. And it escalated. People continued to ignore and the policies continued to escalate. We didn’t go from zero to where we are now. People caused this.

Re: Governments Introduce Surveillance Under Veil of Coronavirus Control

#45
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you assume that yourself are the number guy and know better, so what is the equation that will determine when lockdown is more efficient? what are the inputs in that equation ? Why car deaths would be a factor in why you should implement a lockdown. If you go to a hospital with a illness X would you like a response like "X kills less then cars in our country, until traffic laws are fixed we decided you can suffer…

He is not even that good as a number guy... Current global stats as I write are: 1446242 confirmed, 83424 deaths which in my calculator is giving 5% not 0,5%

Because everyone that has coronavirus was tested?

Re: Governments Introduce Surveillance Under Veil of Coronavirus Control

#46
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you assume that yourself are the number guy and know better, so what is the equation that will determine when lockdown is more efficient? what are the inputs in that equation ? Why car deaths would be a factor in why you should implement a lockdown. If you go to a hospital with a illness X would you like a response like "X kills less then cars in our country, until traffic laws are fixed we decided you can suffer…

He is not even that good as a number guy... Current global stats as I write are: 1446242 confirmed, 83424 deaths which in my calculator is giving 5% not 0,5%

keyword here is confirmed. Many of us carry the virus and are untested (or "unconfirmed") so that 5% number is likely to massively decrease to around 0.5% at some point if (second keyword), governments decide to implement large scale testing.

Re: Governments Introduce Surveillance Under Veil of Coronavirus Control

#47

It’s too bad that people can’t follow simple requests. Governments are forced to choose between allowing idiot citizens to destroy society or to implement draconian policies. Medical professionals are being asked to come out of retirement. Nurses are reusing PPE for weeks. Medical students are graduating early to help. The rest of us are being asked to just stay the fuck home for a few weeks. And we just refuse to do…

It’s not a simple request for people living paycheck to paycheck. We could’ve shut down international travel, implemented UBI or expanded Medicare instead of trillions in corporate bailouts. It’s laughable to blame idiot citizens for the scale of the devastation, but a convenient scapegoat to shift the focus away from the ones in power who could’ve made the most difference.

Oh yes it’s all paycheck to paycheck people congregating in Central Park.

Re: Governments Introduce Surveillance Under Veil of Coronavirus Control

#48
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He is not even that good as a number guy... Current global stats as I write are: 1446242 confirmed, 83424 deaths which in my calculator is giving 5% not 0,5%

Because everyone that has coronavirus was tested?

[deleted]

Re: Governments Introduce Surveillance Under Veil of Coronavirus Control

#49

Giving up your liberties here will likely be a permanent choice. Live free or die.

Wish we could shout "Let freedom ring!" and hit the liberty bell with a mallet, but because of the crack it would likely make a humorous "tink."

Re: Governments Introduce Surveillance Under Veil of Coronavirus Control

#50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know it's annecdotal, but now I've had two elderly relatives die -- one from covid-19, and one from a heart attack, in the past few weeks. The second wasn't able to get into the healthcare system because it is just too overstretched. Firstly, causes by a very slow ambulance, and got diverted to an ER just about as far away as you can get. I have also seen more people walking along our city exercise path than ever b…

I'm most certainly not opposed to saving lives. But we can't just mindlessly approve whatever "solutions" the government comes up with. Some "solutions" are bound to do more harm than good, and mass-surveillance is a prime example considering its potential for abuse. Just as people die from disease, people also die from tyrannical governments. Even if we assume that your government, however unlikely, would forever co…

Well, I love the positive attitude implying time will cure pandemics. Cure, in the sense that all things come to an end, the way all bleeding stops, yeah.

I'm currently working as an infectious disease researcher for a state with a lot of political turmoil, and I'll have the be honest, my (profesional) opinion doesn't matter. No single recommendation we have made has had any bearing on the action of our state. These opinions we (you and I) have are moot.

Post reply on HN